Further proof Mary is not out Mother is found in the infallible Word of God, which contradicts Rome all day long:

Galatians 4:26
But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

So! The heavenly Jerusalem is our MOTHER, not Mary! Well well well! What will the Cathoholics say now? They will IGNORE THIS.

All the talk about Mary being “full of grace”? This is true, but what does that MEAN? That she is a “goddess”? Hardly. Notice:

John:
1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I
spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was
before me.
1:16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.

So we too have received his FULNESS AND GRACE! Now I know the poor Cathoholics can’t understand this because they haven’t experienced it, because they are bound in a dead-religion completely devoid of God’s Spirit and Truth. But to those of us who have received of HIS FULNESS AND GRACE, no man-made, pagan religion pretending to be Christian can take it away with phony arguments and sophistry.

Notice also Judges 5:24

5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be,
blessed shall she be above women in the tent.

Whoa! Who is THIS WOMAN??? Do any Cathoholic apologists even know? Of course not! They don’t pray to her! The Jews never prayed to her because she was called blessed above women! Such a designation does not make a woman a goddess, despite Rome’s hallucination that it does.

Yeah, I’ve ignored it, and won’t respond to him. But I’m just wondering how we can defend against this when its presented in more more civilized and diplomatic fashion.

Mary’s not our Mother? Call no man “father”, but the New Testament refers to Abraham as our father…hmmmmm…not the most logical argument against Mary as our Mother.

Mary: full of grace; we all have the fullness of grace? Well, Mary received her grace before the Saviour of the world was made flesh. What other human can attest to that? (Not so sure about this one. Help me out.)

Mary’s “blessed” is no different than Jahel’s “blessed”? He quotes: Blessed ABOVE woman…but Douay Rheims says: Blessed AMONG woman. I’m not sure if this makes a difference. But certainly Mary’s role compared to Jahel’s is much greater, and Mary prophesied that “all generations will call her blessed.” Jahel made no such claim and, turns out, Mary was right.

Not that I’m an expert in Marian apologetics, but I’ve never heard his “arguments” before. In any case, this guy is not seeking to debate; he’s picking and choosing Scripture quotes that could somehow be taken (out of context, of course) to refer indirectly to Mary.

20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

Is Eve greater than Mary?

1 King 2

19 When Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, the king stood up to meet her, bowed down to her and sat down on his throne. **He had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down at his right hand. **

20 “I have one small request to make of you,” she said. "Do not refuse me."
The king replied, **“Make it, my mother; I will not refuse you.” **

The mother was the queen, not the wife! A king could have many wives but he only has one mother! Jesus is our King,therefore His mother is our Queen.

Revelation 12

5And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne.

If you believe this is talking about Jesus then “she” is Mary.

**Revelation 12:17 **

17 So the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus

Do we keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus? Then we would be “the rest of her children”.“her” being Mary.

And when we receive the Body and Blood of Jesus in around about way aren’t we receiving Mary too?

Just a thought:blush:

This bothers me a little. In human genetics an X chromomsome comes from the female. It combines with either an X or Y from the male.
If the male produces an X sperm, then the offspring is female. If the male produces a Y sperm, the offspring is a male.
So, if all of Jesus’ genetic material came from Mary (which is what I always believed before I realised this), then Jesus would have to have been female (XX).

Even though Magnum V8 is a bit “passionate”, there is also some truth to the concept that there are some parts of the church that had their origins in paganism. Many pagan symbols were Christianised. Jesus was not born on December 25th. Ever wonder why we have as a symbol of Easter the Bunny, a symbol of fertility? Until recently I thought the Church Christianised pagan festivals, hijacking them to facilitate conversion of pagans. However, there was a tussle at the time of Constantine between the two religions and Christianity won. Much was adopted to Christianity in terms of symbolism anyway.

You could look at it like this: Christianity “absorbed” or “swallowed up” paganism, which was used to worshipping the feminine goddess. To have veneration of Mary, albeit deserved, sure would have made the pagans more comfortable.

But then I’m a mother with sons and they are a part of me as well as I am a part of them as is their father.

But Jesus did not have a “human” father. So His human nature comes completely from Mary don’t you think?

Genesis 3
15And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise him on the heel."

Why does God say “her seed”?

Only the "seed’ of man is ever said.This is the one and only time we see “her seed”.It is because there is no “human” father.So do “X” and “Y” really have a place here I wonder? This is God we are talking about.Anything is possible.

Yeah, it’s Christianity 101. Jesus is the God-man. Fully God, and also fully man. He even refers to Himself sometimes as the son on God and sometimes as the Son of Man.

My point is that a female without male genetic material cannot produce a male. Even though it is probably a “myth”, Eve was made from Adam’s rib.

So in some way God must have contributed to Jesus humanity as well as Divintiy.

Possibly when the Spirit of the Most High overshadowed Mary, he impregnated her with a “Most High” sperm. If Jesus was fully human, he started life as a zygote. A single cell with genetic material from his mother and father.

If he was to be made in a lab, using cloning a Mary’s DNA only, he’d be female every time. Either that, or he’d be a clone of Mary!

poster denies the Incarnation, foundational doctrine for all doctrine that follows on Jesus Christ and his mission on earth, and therefore is not only an angry ex-Catholic but an angry ex-Christian. more helpful would be helping him deal with the roots of his anger and find healing for them, than to take an intellectual apologetics approach.

5:24 Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be,
blessed shall she be above women in the tent.

Whoa! Who is THIS WOMAN??? Do any Cathoholic apologists even know? Of course not! They don’t pray to her! The Jews never prayed to her because she was called blessed above women! Such a designation does not make a woman a goddess, despite Rome’s hallucination that it does.

And does all generations call her blessed, I don’t think so, Mary will and is called Blessed among women for All Generations.

And did Jael give birth to Our Saviour ? I think Jael was Blessed of her people, where Mary is Blessed for all generations.

I suppose this woman believes that money is the root of all evil as-well ?

Re: “…the infallible Word of God which contradicts Rome all day long…”

The Word of God is Jesus, not scripture. Click the link in my signature below.

It is impossible for scripture to be infallible. Language cannot be bent that way. Scripture can be inerrant, but not infallible.

Rome is a disrespectful, inaccurate misnomer for the Catholic Church. Would the author of this screwballishness like being called Geneva or Wittenburg or Chicago? How silly is that? Then why should we respond to being called Rome?

You could look at it like this: Christianity “absorbed” or “swallowed up” paganism, which was used to worshipping the feminine goddess. To have veneration of Mary, albeit deserved, sure would have made the pagans more comfortable.

But who says Christianity did anything of the sort?

Veneration of the BVM has taken on different forms and intensities over the years, so to retroject our veneration upon the RCC when it dealt with paganism is to commit a serious historiographical error.